One fact however, as it reflects considerable _credit_ on the _respectability_ of the Defendant and his legal friend, must not be omitted—the person employed to _defend_ the Prisoner was a Jew Attorney, very well known to many. He applied to the Prosecutor’s father several times, and tendered his services to conduct the prosecution, assuring him he should not expect any pecuniary remuneration for his exertions in bringing such a character to justice. He advised the Father, as he was a poor man, to accept a sum of money, if it were offered, and compromise the business: this proposal was indignantly rejected, and the man treated as he deserved to be—with merited contempt. We regret also that a man, whose duty is the apprehension of transgressors against our laws, should have interfered most unjustly to hush up the matter. Some, perhaps, may think that too much severity appears in our observations against the Prisoner—but, can this be the case? Can any man feel too indignant at the conduct of such miscreants?—We cordially agree with the learned Counsel for the Prisoner, that if a wish would sweep such characters from the creation, that wish would be immediately expressed by every true British heart.—Are we too severe? _Remember the conduct of the Almighty_, _who sent fire and brimstone from Heaven_, _and consumed the GUILTY Inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah_, _lest their filthy bodies should pollute the grave_. The friends of the Prisoner have publicly supported him in his defence by their Subscriptions. The Prosecutor has stood almost alone; but, confident that the liberality of the Public was never appealed to in vain—that they will always assist the injured poor in bringing their oppressors to punishment, this Publication is submitted to them; and they may rest assured that the profits will be devoted towards defraying the expenses which have been necessarily incurred in bringing this “Monster of Iniquity” to Justice. 21_st_ _August_, 1817. THE TRIAL, &c. &c. THE KING _versus_ JOHN CHURCH. THE Indictment charged, “That the Defendant, late of the parish of St. Mary, Lambeth, in the county of Surrey, on the 26th day of September, in the fifty-seventh year of the reign of George the Third, with force and arms, at the parish aforesaid, in the county aforesaid, in and upon one Adam Foreman, in the peace of God and our said Lord the King, then and there being, did make an assault, and him, the said Adam Foreman, then and there did beat, wound, and ill treat, so that his life was greatly despaired of, with intent, that most horrid, detestable, and sodomitical crime (among Christians not to be named) called Buggery, with the said Adam Foreman, against the order of nature, then, and there feloniously, wickedly, and devilishly, to commit and do, to the great displeasure of Almighty God, to the great damage of the said Adam Foreman, and against the peace.” &c. The second count charged a common assault.